Wednesday, November 12, 2008

food production or distribution...

...which are we talking about changing?

If you’re new to the hot topic of food and farming and how our agricultural system works and you're spending any time at all catching up you’re bound to run across lots of occasions of food industry giants talking about hunger and what it will take to end it. In fact if most of your information comes from such sources, including much of the mainstream press on the topic, you’re likely to end up thinking that what we really need in order to feed the nearly 1 billion people who don’t have enough food to eat is a change in the way we produce food. We need the seeds of genetically modified plants available to more farmers so they can increase yields. We need new pesticides to help harvest more food. We need to be able to clone animals for more meat. We need to make synthetic fertilizers available to those in the developing world with larger percentages of their populations going hungry. As far as the international agribusiness corporations think we just need another green revolution to help us grow more food and that only these types of changes in production will feed more people. By the way this is totally false.

If instead you’ve done your homework when it comes to hunger issues- maybe you’ve read World Hunger 12 Myths by Frances Moore Lappe’ et al- you know that here on Earth we already grow enough food to feed everyone more than twice what they need, we just don’t distribute it well. But because so many of us are in the former category- people who are largely divorced from food issues besides going to the grocery store and eating fast food- this probably comes as a shock to many of you reading this.

Don’t feel bad if your relationship with food doesn’t include an intimate knowledge of where or how it is grown, how far it travels on its way to meet you and how much energy, synthetic chemicals, underpaid labor and animal cruelty is involved in getting it to you. The system is set up to keep us in the dark. I didn’t grow up on a farm and it wasn’t until after university that I began to discover these issues for myself. And yes one of the biggest surprises for me was learning that we already produce more than enough food to feed everyone. Remember the Ethiopia famine that received so much attention here in the US in the mid 80s. Yup, they were exporting food from Ethiopia during that entire crisis. The people that died during that famine didn’t die because there wasn’t enough food available in that country, they died because they couldn’t afford to buy it and didn’t have access to what they needed to grow their own. The rich people to whom the food was exported continued to eat quite well thank you.

Sometimes when I suggest that growing more of our own, as we did during WWII in Victory Gardens, is an appropriate idea based on the rising cost of food and the damaging effects of industrial agriculture, someone suggests I’m in favor of food rationing as that policy was in part responsible for the Victory Garden movement (even though it was mostly about household food security). But the truth is we already ration food. We just ration it by price. We distribute food on a sliding scale based on how much money a person has. And there are lots of people waking up to this reality. Once you spend any time at all learning about our food system you will quickly find people suggesting that it’s not production that needs improvement, it’s distribution.

And of course on a certain level those people are exactly right. If we had a system where by every human being on Earth could go to their local market and get the exact same amount of food as everyone else we’d have enough to feed roughly twice as many people as are living on the planet today. Now listen closely because this is important. The planet can’t handle a doubling of the human population and I am not suggesting we should try that. Other resources- water jumps to mind- are already under extreme duress, to say nothing of the challenges we face regarding climate change. Overpopulation and overconsumption by certain segments of the population (think the Global North especially the US) is a big problem.

And it’s important to note the some of the agricultural processes of industrial agriculture are incredibly destructive and cannot be continued indefinitely. It’s likely that they can’t even be continued for very much longer. Soil for instance is being lost and degraded at an alarming rate. This issue alone threatens our ability to continue feeding even the current population of the planet at today’s rate of inhabitance. That is, we’re going to have to change the way we produce food anyway because industrial agriculture is too destructive to allow it to continue without risking our very survival. But it is true to point out that if we had a more just and fair system of distribution for the time being we could feed everyone including the predicted increase in human population over the next few decades using our current system of production. It is technically about distribution at this exact point in time.

Then again is it? At the turn of last century about a third of the US population was involved in agriculture. By 1950 that number was down to about 15%. Today it stands at less than 2%. So the current means of production includes a small number of people growing lots of food for almost everyone else.

The other 98% do something entirely different. So while it is true that we currently have more than enough food to feed the other 98% if we had a more equitable means of food distribution, we still must make changes because of how destructive our current system is. And maybe trying to figure out how to feed more people by changing either the means of production *or* changing the means of distribution is like not seeing a forest full of trees. Maybe hiding in this false dichotomy is the real answer to the problem of how to feed everyone. Perhaps the answer is that we have to change the means of production by changing the means of distribution or vice versa if you prefer. Maybe the answer is that more of us need to grow food.

The Chinese proverb goes, "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and you have introduced another competitor into the overcrowded fishing industry. But teach a man to farm and, well, you’ve got a farmer." Alright that translation is a bit loose but I bet you get the point. Now there are some mental frameworks that have to be tweaked in order for this crazy scheme to work. Sharon and I (and others) are calling for many more people to become actively involved in agriculture again. In our book we call for 100 million new gardeners and farmers and 200 million new home cooks. That’s roughly 1/3 and 2/3 of the US population respectively. That’s a huge increased compared to today’s standards. Historically speaking though, it’s not that high of a percentage.

But we also have all sorts of tools and techniques available to us now that we not available to us the last time such a percentage of Americans grew more of their own food. We’re talking about changing the means of production both by including more people but also by using the best methods of producing food from the past and from the present. I should probably save more on that for the book. It’s available for pre order on Amazon by the way which is less a shameless plug than a proud coauthor sharing his supreme pleasure in finally seeing up there.

OK it's both pride and a plug but back to the discussion about what an agricultural shift might look like. My point here is that this isn’t a suggestion that we simply abandon everything about where we are in space and time. We’re not suggesting that we all get into our time machines and travel back to the early 1900s and that we try to land them all in corn fields. This is 2008 and many more of us live in towns and cities and suburbs. That is reality. But so is the fact that despite the rise of industrial agriculture and all its destructiveness we still don’t feed almost a billion of the people on the planet. About 12% of the population here in the US is food insecure, meaning they don’t have enough to eat on a regular basis. This may be better than at other points in recent history (and worse than others going farther back) but better is not itself success.

Success means feeding everyone and success will not come until we make a change in the way we eat. If more people are growing more of their own food then by we have a better system of production. This we know. People like Peter Rosset have been telling us for quite a while that small scale agriculture is more productive per unit of land than larger scale operations. A recent study from the UN suggests something similar saying,

The research conducted by the UN Environment Programme suggests that organic, small-scale farming can deliver the increased yields which were thought to be the preserve of industrial farming, without the environmental and social damage which that form of agriculture brings with it.

An analysis of 114 projects in 24 African countries found that yields had more than doubled where organic, or near-organic practices had been used. That increase in yield jumped to 128 per cent in east Africa. – The Independent

But more people are growing more of their own food also means a better system of distribution. Highly concentrated systems of anything are risky in that they can easily exclude people. De-concentrating our system of food distribution by actively including at least 1/3 of Americans in agriculture means more people are more likely to get fed. This isn’t just because it’s more productive per unit of land to do so but also because many more of us will have access to food right on our own property and because more gardeners and farmers means a higher likelihood that someone near everyone is growing food. We’re talking about the underpinnings of the relocalization of agriculture. This could lead to all sorts of sharing, gifting, bartering and buying economies of local farmers growing food for local people. And this network of- is it production or distribution?- means overlap. It means variety. It means fresher food, which means more and better cooking and healthier people. And ultimately a better fed world. We have a long way to go but the time to start is now.

18 comments:

Earthsmile
said...

Hi,Stumbled upon your Blog.Organic, small scale gardens/farms are the answer. We've got to get ourselves off 'Oil' & 'Natural Gas' dependencies (fertilizers, pesticides). millions, or tens of millions, of small scale gardeners/farmers will replace the giant agribusiness model just fine.GM plants/seeds ? No. Ditto for 'new pesticides', etc. the old time 'natural' way is our way forward. Peak oil & Natural Gas demands this approach. And we would be best suited to voluntarily reduce our use of Oil and Natural Gas at rates that exceed the drop in supply. That way we can get out in front of the downward availability curve, and manage the transition in less than a crisis fashion.

I grew up on a small self-sustaining farm - several milk cows, pigs, chickens, 10-acres of hay, an acre of potatoes, and an acre of vegetables. Plus food from hunting and berrying in a big way. An abundance of food was produced and a large amount sold locally. From meat to eggs, vegetables, butter, cream.

I believe this: much of the worlds problems come from the fact that an ever greater percentage of people haven't a real clue just where food really comes from and how it gets to the table. This is dangerous to be sure.

"As the Good Books says, 'When a poor man eats a chicken, one of them must be sick.'

"And where does the Good Book say that?!?"

It says it right next to the place where it says "Jesus said, Give a man a fish and he eats for a day."

Please, Aaron, get your facts right. What you ascribe to Jesus is a Chinese proverb. It is not in the New Testament.

We are very sympathetic to what you are saying, in fact we feel it is important enough to urge you to not make such blatant errors. When you do make blatant errors, it causes all your facts to be suspect.

You might consider a mention of the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture (PASA). I realize you're not in PA, but this is an organization that is making great strides in my state to work towards more sustainable agriculture, to preserve farmers on farms, and to draw a new generation to farming. I'm a gardener/homesteader/home cook, not a farmer, but we're all eaters. And I've learned a lot of very useful things through PASA. Check them out at pasafarming.org

I understand about the emphasis on organic methods - but what about the legal locks that commercial agribusiness has gotten Congress to impose on distribution?

Specifically - grain elevators buy wheat here in north central Oklahoma. In the last couple of years, they have stopped selling wheat - since federal regulations prohibit anyone from selling harvested wheat to be used for seed. It might - might, mind you! - violate some seed company's patent on their genetically modified wheat.

One farmer made the news two years ago, by being sued. It seems a GMO plot next to his land accidentally (?!) spread some GMO seed into the farmer's field. At harvest, the seed company involved tested the farmer's wheat - and found a minute percentage matched the DNA markers for their protected crop.

Stupid, protectionist market practices have to be addressed to achieve progress. Luck.

some small farmers technically you are right and I have appropriately changed the post but remember, Jesus disappeared from age 12 until his early thirties. Don't you think it's very likely that during his sabbatical he hitchhiked over into Asia and read the very same proverb for himself and later paraphrased it? I say that because in my defense, where I live people ascribe all sorts of stuff to Jesus that muddies the water on which he supposedly walked. This was grade school bible study rearing its frightful head. Tongue in cheek and a big grin all around.

And thanks Kate. Most of my family is from PA so I'm happy to hear about your useful resource in that region.

Brad K. I suggest riots, peaceful riots of course, to dismantle short term legal locks and I suggest meaningful conversations about local food sovereignty going forward. There is a special place in hell for those who think they have the right to charge farmers high prices to pollute the gene pool of the plants that sustain us all. I'd love to hear Jesus’s thoughts on that.

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

a biblical jubilee must be declared. each head of a family, related people living together, receives an allotment for the size of the family and the productivity of the land. larger families get more land and less productive land or for mining, grazing etc. would be larger tracts, still owned and operated by family. children in school or specialists working away from home on salary would vote on changes and operating decisions.

WoW shares many wow gold of its features with previously launched games. Essentially, you battle with Cheapest wow gold monsters and traverse the countryside, by yourself or as a buy cheap wow gold team, find challenging tasks, and go on to higher Cheap Wow Gold levels as you gain skill and experience. In the course of your journey, you will be gaining new powers that are increased as your skill rating goes up. All the same, in terms of its features and quality, that is a ture stroy for this.WoW is far ahead of all other games of the genre the wow power leveling game undoubtedly is in a league of its own and cheapest wow gold playing it is another experience altogether.Even though WoW is a wow gold cheap rather complicated game, the controls and interface are done in buy warhammer gold such a way that you don't feel the complexity. A good feature of the game is that it buy wow items does not put off people with lengthy manuals. The instructions cannot be simpler and the pop up tips can help you start playing the game World Of Warcraft Gold immediately. If on the other hand, you need a detailed manual, the instructions are there for you to access. Buy wow gold in this site,good for you ,WoW Gold, BUY WOW GOLD.

On Wednesday, June 10th the Emergency Services Program of Catholic Charities of Oswego County in cooperation with the Food Bank of Central New York will sponsor a fresh food distribution. Fresh foods and produce will be available, free of charge to those in need, from 4:00 pm until 6:00 pm or until food is gone.

While Western society is over-nourished, with growing numbers of people overweight or obese, over 800 million people do not have enough food. Most of the world's hungry are concentrated in developing countries: 40% are in India and China.

The people that died during that famine didn’t die because there wasn’t enough food available in that country, they died because they couldn’t afford to buy it and didn’t have access to what they needed to grow their own.